|
DJExile posted:ESPN is holding a viewer contest where 2 winners will debate SAS and Kellerman on First Take I want EDP to win
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 03:54 |
|
|
Yeah so Nantz could be in trouble for this https://twitter.com/ProFootballTalk/status/786955334023806977
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2016 17:34
|
|
|
Vertical Lime posted:Yeah so Nantz could be in trouble for this Nantz is even whiter and more pearl clutching than Bob Costas. That's not really new for him.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
I mean he will be in trouble in the sense that people on the internet will continue to be like "man Jim Nantz is the worst" (which he is for a lot of reasons) but that doesn't seem like a thing that would get him in any actual trouble
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
Apparently Toronto's radio announcer Jerry Howarth refuses to refer to the Cleveland Indians by their team name out of respect for Indigenous people after a fella from Northern Ontario wrote to him and pointed out how offensive he finds the whole deal. Same for the Braves. As a Cleveland fan I'm very okay with it. http://www.ctvnews.ca/sports/why-the-voice-of-the-blue-jays-won-t-say-indians-during-playoffs-1.3112230
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
This is a better fake story https://www.thebeaverton.com/2016/10/baseball-announcer-refuses-use-offensive-term-cleveland/
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
MourningView posted:I mean he will be in trouble in the sense that people on the internet will continue to be like "man Jim Nantz is the worst" (which he is for a lot of reasons) but that doesn't seem like a thing that would get him in any actual trouble So Jim Nantz is accidentally right.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2016 02:57
|
|
|
Crazy Ted posted:The whole point of the anthem protests is to draw attention for police mistreatment of black people, so as long as the cameras focus on those players their protests are achieving their purpose. i think kapernick had actually sat for a few anthems before the shitstorm started though
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2016 04:51
|
|
|
hifi posted:i think kapernick had actually sat for a few anthems before the shitstorm started though It's true. He sat and nobody noticed because he wasn't in uniform so they thought he was just a random guy and he got lost in the eye wash. He was only noticed because a 49ers beat writer/blogger noticed and took a photo in the third preseason game (the first he was in uniform)
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2016 05:02
|
|
|
You know how we keep talking about the sharp decline in NFL ratings? Well England has a similar issue with the Premier League right now. http://awfulannouncing.com/2016/premier-league-ratings-are-falling-dramatically-in-england.html Their system is significantly different than ours when it comes to things like this (Sky Sports is a whopping £13.75 extra per month, which gives you football, rugby, F1, etc). I don't know BT's pricing but it is similar to that I imagine. They keep citing the Olympics and illegal streaming but as someone who watches the PL weekly, the big problem is the Sunday games and late Saturday games have been a giant load of poo poo all season. All times given from here on out are in local time in the UK. The 3PM kickoff games (which is when most matches are played) are not shown on local television in the UK but none of the bigger match ups ever occur at that time. The big matches usually air at 12pm and somewhere around 530pm. Sunday matches have been a bit dire for the most part this season. Matchday 7 had some solid Sunday matches but that's really it. I think as we get closer to Christmas and you start to see more and more marquee matchups, it will be interesting to see if ratings improve. No week by week ratings were provided, which is what would really interest me. I also wonder if Match of the Day contributes to this since people can just tune in at the end of the day and catch significant highlights of all the matches.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 16:25
|
|
|
Akileese posted:You know how we keep talking about the sharp decline in NFL ratings? Well England has a similar issue with the Premier League right now. Yeah I keep up on matches pretty regularly since I don't sleep in much anymore and NBCSN has done a great job here in the states in their coverage/simulcasting, but man the matchups have been rough this year.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 16:32
|
|
|
Yesterday's "Super Sunday" offering was a double header of Middlesbrough vs Watford followed by Southampton vs Burnley, two games which even the supporters would struggle to define as "super". Tonight we get Liverpool vs Man United, then Chelsea vs United next week but the televised games so far this season have been beyond putrid, aside from maybe the first half of the Manchester derby
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 16:59
|
|
|
I think the declining ratings are because people don't want to give Rupert Murdoch money.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
CaptainYesterday posted:I think the declining ratings are because people don't want to give Rupert Murdoch money. If people stopped watching any product, league, show, or sport based on not liking the owner, the entire sports and entertainment industry would completely vanish.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
Well for a game that has been over hyped for a fortnight, Liverpool vs United was a prime reason why people will just stop watching. It was a loving awful game, and even Tyler and Neville couldn't make it exciting, hell Neville sounded bored most of the night. But if they keep serving up dross like this, then only the die hards will keep watching
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
As a West Coaster I haven't been watching as much EPL this year, mostly because all the games I'm actually interested in start at 4:30 and I'm not waking up that early on a Saturday. Meanwhile the 9:30 game is some poo poo like Watford/West Brom or whatever and I'm already checked out to watch college football instead. The scheduling just baffles me. Why are they putting all the marquee games that early in the day? Why did they schedule Liverpool/United on a Monday night a week after an international break so neither team gives a poo poo?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 22:41
|
|
|
I think there are just better options on television. Why watch a lovely meaningless primetime game when I can watch something from HBO or Netflix? I can easily follow along on Twitter to see if anything big happens. Even get Vines of the biggest plays. I'd watch more primetime football if they cut back on the commercials. It's also worth mentioning that the NFL still destroys everyone else in ratings so they are still printing money even with the drop. Last night's garbage game will crush the NLCS ratings of two of the biggest TV markets. Niwrad fucked around with this message at 22:44 on Oct 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 22:41
|
|
|
Also the NFL should be pushing hard for legalized sports gambling. Fantasy had to be a huge boost to the league and being able to easily put down $20 on the Monday Night Football game would help draw more interest.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 22:42
|
|
|
I do feel sorry for people that have to rebroadcast EPL games overseas. Sometimes the random computer draw puts all the good games in like a 2 week period which is then repeated at the end of the season. Then you have to try and get excited about the mentioned Watford v Boro game.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
Benne posted:The scheduling just baffles me. Why are they putting all the marquee games that early in the day? Why did they schedule Liverpool/United on a Monday night a week after an international break so neither team gives a poo poo? In England, to get people to go in person to games you can't telecast the games at the normal kick off. As such if the game is super big they move it to early in the day so you can watch it at the pub or whatever before you go to you local club to watch a game in person. Also fwiw europa league teams often play on sundays to give them an extra day off after a match which obviously didn't occur this week due to internationals. As for why United played Liverpool this matchday that is the random scheduling computer. As for why it was Monday night they have been tooling around with Monday Night football but idgi either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 22:51
|
|
|
Was reading about it in this article and one thing I did notice is that pay tv isn't falling in England: http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soccer/english-soccer/ken-early-you-can-watch-nothing-and-yet-miss-nothing-1.2832070 quote:The only glitch in this theory as it applies to the Premier League is that, unlike the declining US networks, Sky’s overall subscriber base is still increasing, albeit slowly. I know the usually-cited streaming services have been around for a few years, but it just seems like in the past year something has happened that's caused bigger declines now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
Niwrad posted:Also the NFL should be pushing hard for legalized sports gambling. Fantasy had to be a huge boost to the league and being able to easily put down $20 on the Monday Night Football game would help draw more interest. Most of the big NFL owners already have ownership stakes in the major fantasy platforms. The Raiders moving to Vegas will help move things along.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2016 08:53
|
|
|
Colts/Texas was down 38 percent vs Colts/Pats last year. A five year low for SNF. It was easy for them to blame the debate with Packers vs Giants, but record lows twice in a row has to be a concern. It'll be interesting to see how this shakes out as they start flexing bigger games. I really think the sheer volume of terrible teams has a huge part on this. A lot of my friends who watch football say that between the terrible teams and officiating slowing games down even more, they're borderline unwatchable. http://awfulannouncing.com/2016/colts-texans-hits-five-year-snf-low-down-38-per-cent-from-2015-week-six.html Back to Premier League ratings, does anyone know the ratings for NBCSN so far this year? I haven't been able to find much.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2016 15:50
|
|
|
a game with the colts drew worse than a game with the patriots?????????? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
MourningView posted:a game with the colts drew worse than a game with the patriots?????????? The Colts were in both games.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2016 19:30
|
|
|
Meant Texans but whatever point stands
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
Some poor bastard sat through a full day of all the debate shows and live blogged them TL/DR: They all talk about the same exact topics, "His & Hers" and "Highly Questionable" are the most tolerable because there's no screaming and a far more lighthearted tone.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2016 15:44
|
|
|
MourningView posted:Meant Texans but whatever point stands I'm starting to wonder if issues related to market saturation are starting to hit the NFL. We've had a couple of years of the draft being moved to a ridiculous 3-4 day event in May so you now get four months to over-analyze it after college football ends. We've had a couple of full years of Thursday Night Football, which has mostly been crap. If the league had its way there would be an 18-game season. We have the Super Bowl in early February now, 2-3 weeks later than it was just a couple of decades ago. We have three-hour pregame shows. We have three-hour postgame shows. We have studio shows that seem like they have eighteen panelists. We're supposed to treat preseason football like it's the real thing now. We get extensive, multi-paragraph analysis of seventh-round draft picks who are highly unlikely to ever be more than marginal contributors in the league. I think sooner or later you an overload point, and when you get to it people start to tune the product out a little bit at a time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2016 16:22
|
|
|
There aren't a lot of good matchups. But the way they broadcast the games is wearing thin on people. The touchdown/extra point/commercial/kickoff/commercial thing is terrible to sit through. Being locked into games that devolve into boring flagfests and not switching to other ones hurts too. I can't remember the last time the networks cut away from a lopsided or boring game to a more exciting one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2016 16:31
|
|
|
Double post. Weird!
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2016 16:30
|
|
|
It's also a painfully predictable product too. You know who the top 4 teams are going to be every year, and below that it's dumpster fires and also-rans. There are very rarely surprises. Thursday night games are all trash. The London games are all trash, and there's no chance anyone west of the Mississippi is watching those. 11 minutes of actual playing interspersed among 4 hours of commercials, live reads of commercials, and graphics of commercials. Review after review after review after review. Now people want pass interference calls reviewed, which I'm sure does have dramatic effects on the outcomes, but is also going to make the game all the drat longer. EDIT Codependent Poster posted:Being locked into games that devolve into boring flagfests and not switching to other ones hurts too. YES, this. I can easily skip away from another dull rear end noon Big Ten football game on Saturday and find 4 others that are more entertaining. With the NFL I'm stuck with whatever my CBS and Fox affiliate show me, unless I pay a bunch extra for the league package. DJExile fucked around with this message at 16:40 on Oct 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
Codependent Poster posted:There aren't a lot of good matchups. But the way they broadcast the games is wearing thin on people. The touchdown/extra point/commercial/kickoff/commercial thing is terrible to sit through. Being locked into games that devolve into boring flagfests and not switching to other ones hurts too. This is a problem with pretty much every league but the NBA. The NFL seems headed down the path of MLB and NHL where people care about their local team but no one bothers with the national stuff. The NFL prints money still but it does seem a bit short-sighted on their part.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2016 16:40
|
|
|
Niwrad posted:This is a problem with pretty much every league but the NBA. The NFL seems headed down the path of MLB and NHL where people care about their local team but no one bothers with the national stuff. Baseball and hockey fanbases seem to be a lot more.... I suppose 'tribal' is the word than football too. People are fiercely loyal to their one team and largely stick just to it. Hockey really seems to be this way, where you have the die-hards far out-weighing the casual fans. Football at the college (and especially pro) level will have fans of specific teams, but those fans will also typically watch the other games as well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2016 16:42
|
|
|
DJExile posted:It's also a painfully predictable product too. You know who the top 4 teams are going to be every year, and below that it's dumpster fires and also-rans. There are very rarely surprises. The NFC has had a different Super Bowl representative almost every year for this century. Just because the Patriots are always good and the Browns are always bad doesn't mean it's predictable. It's not the NBA where we're just assuming the Finals will be the same for the third year in a row.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
RedZone is also the only thing keeping me watching other teams each week. I'd love it if they could stagger the loving games a bit so that there are always 4-5 on at any given time on Sunday. Would it kill them to start the Central and Pacific time zone games an hour later?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
maybe the issue really is that there's way too much parity, and no superstar-driven teams like the NBA currently has with the Warriors/Cavs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2016 16:53
|
|
|
In the AFC there isn't really any parity, with the Pats/Broncos/Steelers/Colts usually up there. But I don't think anyone expected the Panthers to be this bad And yeah, baseball/hockey is very tribal, in basketball it's easier to market stars
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2016 17:00
|
|
|
Niwrad posted:This is a problem with pretty much every league but the NBA. Niwrad posted:The NFL seems headed down the path of MLB and NHL where people care about their local team but no one bothers with the national stuff. It's easier - at least to me - to bounce around NFL or college games due to the fact that most of the action is limited to one day a week. I want to see the best games in that situation. Alain Post posted:maybe the issue really is that there's way too much parity, and no superstar-driven teams like the NBA currently has with the Warriors/Cavs. Codependent Poster posted:The touchdown/extra point/commercial/kickoff/commercial thing is terrible to sit through. Crazy Ted fucked around with this message at 17:11 on Oct 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
Vertical Lime posted:And yeah, baseball/hockey is very tribal, in basketball it's easier to market stars With hockey, part of that problem was having many, many years of little to no national television package like other sports do. Up until the '90s, ESPN really didn't cover much, ABC had an occasional afternoon window of hockey, and that was it. The hockey that you were watching was your local team, and those habits stuck. NBC has done a much better job of marketing all of hockey, but there's still only a handful of teams that are playing on the traditional NBC network in the afternoon.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2016 17:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 03:54 |
|
|
The NBA is good because the games are short. I can turn on a national TV game at 7 and it's done by 9:30. I'm looking at almost 4 hours for a Monday Night Football game. gently caress that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2016 17:15
|
|